The Post Dispatch will be moving to another location (likely downtown) and Hiliker will be marketing the former newspaper Headquarters. What would you like to see done with the building?
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/news ... oving.html

Thought I'd bring this over from the Downtown Office Occupancy thread:

roger wyoming II wrote:Well here is an interesting development:

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 26d4f.html

If the Post-Dispatch indeed relocates somewhere else downtown, that could be a positive as I think the building has pretty decent mixed-use redevelopment potential. I really don't know how much office space they'd take up for leasing, but perhaps they could anchor something like the Courts Building if they want something with a more historic feel or take up a good chunk of available space in one of the traditional office towers.

I'd like to see them in 1010 Market. I believe there's significant space in that building, I think it's Class B and can probably be had at a competitive price, it's pretty high profile and I don't think it would take much for them to get the naming/signage rights. It's right on the Gateway Mall/City Garden and already has KSDK which might provide some opportunities for synergies (maybe?). The Muni Courts Building (1300 Market) is also a great idea - but it sounds like they might be going for something more contemporary and conventional:

“We are a 21st-century media company operating in a mid 20th-century building,” Post-Dispatch Publisher Ray Farris said in a statement.

I'd be interested to know how much square footage they'll need.

^ good question.

1010 Market has the top four floors available totaling 73,000 sq. ft. listed at $16.50/ sq.ft., btw.
Another interesting option in the 50- 75,000 sq. ft. range would be 505 Washington, but closer to $10 sq. ft.

Tear it down. I feel that, like, two hundred or so additional surface parking spaces will really help downtown's northern edge turn the corner toward viability. The 2000+ already around the P-D building just...aren't...enough.

Seriously, the N. Tucker corridor is in heavy need of a Master Plan, and the teeth to enforce it. With the new bridge supposedly funneling Illinois traffic into St. Louis now via Tucker, there's an opportunity to create a meaningful and immediate connection to the City. Instead, I fear this stretch will be filled with fast food drive-thrus in five years time, no better than any mid-state interstate exit.

My plan for the revitalization of North St. Louis starts with infill on those awesomely tiny blocks of parking just west of Tucker and north of Washington...

chaifetz10 wrote:What's the chance that the PD relocates to Maryland Heights to be close to their printing center?

I would think pretty low.

St.Louis Post-Dispatch of Chesterfield.

This looks interesting...

Tech entrepreneur Jim McKelvey's holding company buying Post-Dispatch building



"We don't have a specific tenant in mind but are looking for future tenants," said John Berglund, managing partner and co-founder of StarLake. "It's a terrific building and we're going to try and fill it out. We're open to uses, but I think floors three through six lend themselves to office, with the first floor and its large windows along Tucker where the presses are is ideal for some sort of (entertainment) venue."

https://www.stltoday.com/business/local ... the-latest

"with the first floor and its large windows along Tucker where the presses are is ideal for some sort of (entertainment) venue."

It does indeed look like a nice venue. Really wish something would precipitate for all of those parking lots though. Quite a bit of charm is lost there.

Always found it interesting (or hilarious) that 911 N Tucker still stands there. If that's not completely symbolic of the failure of our urban core over the last 6 decades, I don't know what is. The renovation on it is awesome though. It used to be for sale.

Stltoday - Post-Dispatch building developer seeks tax credits, subsidies to cover half of $70 million project

The developers planning to turn the Post-Dispatch’s longtime home into offices for San Francisco payment processing company Square plan to finance about half of the $70 million project with state and federal tax credits and local subsidies.

https://www.stltoday.com/business/local ... 1a443.html

Insane.

Wait.  So they were doing all of this in the name of spurring development in the city, bringing more jobs Downtown, just to put this on the public?

Commerce Bank, a tentative lender for the project, said financing the project is not feasible without the TIF.

This is something I don't get.  You're a business.  You need office space.  You have to pay for office space.  You don't get free office space, or get a half price building off the back of the tax base.  Does this perplex anyone else? What is "feasible"? A scenario where my company saves as much money as possible?

bwcrow1s wrote: Wait.  So they were doing all of this in the name of spurring development in the city, bringing more jobs Downtown, just to put this on the public?

Commerce Bank, a tentative lender for the project, said financing the project is not feasible without the TIF.

This is something I don't get.  You're a business.  You need office space.  You have to pay for office space.  You don't get free office space, or get a half price building off the back of the tax base.  Does this perplex anyone else? What is "feasible"? A scenario where my company saves as much money as possible?

Square is still paying for the office space once they’re moved in, all of this is to bring the building to class A office space standards. I don’t mind the tax credits- the state and federal but the TIF is too much

^But BWCrow means that if a building costs 70 mil to renovate to standards a company wants, shouldn't the space cost the company whatever the ROI is needed to cover the 70 mil renovation? Extremely valid point.

None of us can walk up to a house that costs $400k and tell the federal and state govs we need it for $200k and they pay half for us.

That said I think the state and federal are 100% must do to keep the company in the city and growing. TIF too much also agree. Our politicians on every level have willfully created an environment where the citizen of the country is less important that the corporate entity. Needs to change but until it does we can't stomp our feet and stand on the sidelines.

Is it time to change the name of the thread to "Is Square worth what they've been given?" 

dbInSouthCity wrote:

bwcrow1s wrote: Wait.  So they were doing all of this in the name of spurring development in the city, bringing more jobs Downtown, just to put this on the public?

Commerce Bank, a tentative lender for the project, said financing the project is not feasible without the TIF.

This is something I don't get.  You're a business.  You need office space.  You have to pay for office space.  You don't get free office space, or get a half price building off the back of the tax base.  Does this perplex anyone else? What is "feasible"? A scenario where my company saves as much money as possible?

Square is still paying for the office space once they’re moved in, all of this is to bring the building to class A office space standards.   I don’t mind the tax credits- the state and federal but the TIF is too much

Totally agree, I think.  I just believe that if this is in your business growth plan, you might want to account for financially that instead of just asking for money.  I think that goes for a lot of projects.

If they're not financially feasible to begin with, why are they even happening? How many financial shots in the city's arm is it going to take to get over the subsidy hump? Will it ever?

^It's never been easier to make money losing money.

I think two little words must have triggered some folks over this..."About half".

There is really nothing unusual about what they are seeking for a project like this.  $24 million of the "about half" is coming from state and federal historic tax credits, and brownfield tax credits.  It is an outdated, historic building which will require a very costly renovation to achieve Class A office space.  And there was certainly light industrial activity in part of the building for decades which will no doubt require some cleanup and disposal of hazardous materials, hence the brownfield tax credits.  So does anyone have a problem with any of that $24 million?

And the $12 million in TIF is not at all unusual for a project that claims to bring 1250 jobs to downtown, and perhaps several hundred new jobs to the region.  Consider Build-A-Bear getting $4 million for their new HQ, for example, for far fewer jobs.  The question shouldn't be whether it's justified, it should be:  will the TIF be tied to achievement and retention of those future employment numbers in some way?  The article does not say.

It would be much cheaper for Square to build a new, bespoke 250,000 SF office building out in Maryland Heights..